Highlights of Supreme Court judgment

# Recovery of Sankararaman letters not proof they were received by Kanchi Acharya or brought to his notice.

# No evidence collected in investigation that Acharya protested or acted against Sankararaman.

# No documents of account in ICICI Bank produced.

# Statement of account in Indian Bank shows Rs.50 lakh received in cash on 30.04.2004 was deposited in Bank on 7.5.2004. This belies prosecution case that cash was retained by petitioner to pay hirelings.

# There should first be prima facie evidence that a person was party to a conspiracy before his acts or statements can be used against his conspirators.

# "No worthwhile prima facie evidence apart from the alleged confessions have been brought to our notice to show that the petitioner (Kanchi Acharya) along with A - 2 (Ravi Subramaniam) and A - 4 (Kathiravan) was party to a conspiracy. The involvement of the petitioner and A - 2 and A - 4 in the alleged conspiracy is sought to be established by the confessions themselves.

# Supreme Court recently decided the case of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar vs. Pappu Yadav "on its own peculiar facts" and Court's observations in that case "cannot have general application so as to apply in every case including the present one."

# Strong case made out prima facie for grant of bail to petitioner.

# Kanchi Acharya shall be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties; shall not visit Mutt premises until submission of chargesheet in court; and shall surrender passport.

# Whatever is said in this judgment is "only for the purpose of disposing of the prayer for bail made by the petitioner" and "nothing contained in this order shall be construed as expression of final opinion on any of the issues of fact or law arising for decision in the case which shall naturally have to be done by the trial court seized of the trial."